The Ever Changing Story of the PRISM Program

Last Thursday brought leaks that about a government program called PRISM. But while the early reports described a program that had unilateral, unfettered access to companies like Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft, subsequent reports made the program look significantly less intrusive. Brooke talks to Wired's Kim Zetter about the evolution of reporting on PRISM, the perils of national security reporting, and what we still don't know about the government program.

Guests:

Hosted by:

Tags:

Comments [4]

April
from Manhattan

I TEND TO AGREE WITH C, THE COMMENT ABOVE, BUT WHO KNOWS? THAT'S THE PROBLEM. HOW LONG HAS THIS NSA PROGRAM BEEN GOING ON, FOR EXAMPLE? WHO STARTED IT? DOES THE UK OR RUSSIA HAVE ANYTHING SIMILAR? I WAS ADDICTED TO "MI5" OR "SPOOKS" - ONE BRITISH PROGRAM THAT WASN'T A "MASTERPIECE . MI5 SEEMED TO BE ABLE TO GET ANY INTELLIGENCE, ANYWHERE, THEY NEEDED. DEFINITELY SPIED ON OTHER EMBASSIES, OTHER COUNTRIES' EMAILS AND ACTIVITIES, SUSPECT BRITISH CITIZENS. THE NY TIMES MENTIONED THAT CONNECTION.

IT'S A BIT MUCH HEARING AN ECUADORIAN TALKING ABOUT THEIR STRONG CIVIL RIGHTS RECORD. CHECK THEM OUT ON REPORTERS WITHOUT BORDERS. ON THE WORLD MAP, I BELIEVE THEY'RE AS BLACK AS CUBA AND COLOMBIA, RUSSIA AND CHINA.

Kim indicated something like 'media should have waited for technical clarification...' There was no point in waiting because of few reasons. NSA is never going to come out with technical details. Yes experts may do some guess work but their experience may not be what is happening today because technology changes too fast. Technical details like method used for transferring files or encryption are small details when compared sharing data.

I totally agree with the first commenter. Also Kim Zetter is not an expert on this topic. Many of the shows I listened to this week interviewed experts on the subject and none of them were in agreement with Kim Zetter. I find that most of the time On the Media and NPR are to the right of center.

Disappointed by NPR's On the Medias's coverage of the NSA scandal. Their agenda seems to be to create a docility and helplessness while placating any fears about governmental abuse of power. On the one hand, they are saying "we figured it out, and it's not as bad as we thought it was". They didn't really go into any detail, just cherry picked a certain method used by PRISM to collect data from certain internet companies and said that it's not so bad.

On the other hand they are more or less saying that as soon as you post something online it's public property as though this is just something we have to get used to.

To sum up the program: 1. The governmental abuses were overblown or as Kim Zetter of Wired said: "not what we thought" 2. Privacy is not something that you should expect in any online interaction. These two statements are in clear contradiction. The whole program had the feel of being produced for docile observers of government with with the same lulling cadence of typical of NPR when talking about the weather or the newest flavor of Ben and Jerry's. Truly a frightening thing to listen to.